Hadiya case: Plea for contempt action against NIA

Shafin Jahan, husband of Adiya @ Akhila moves apex court

Updated - November 19, 2017 09:41 pm IST

Published - November 19, 2017 09:08 pm IST - New Delhi

A few days before the scheduled production of Hadiya @ Akhila before the Supreme Court on November 27, Shafin Jahan, who she is allegedly married to, has moved the apex court seeking contempt action against the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

Mr. Jahan alleged that the NIA had acted in contempt of the Supreme Court’s order of August 16 by proceeding with the investigation despite the fact that Justice R.V. Raveendran, a retired Supreme Court judge the apex court had appointed to supervise the NIA to ensure a fair and impartial probe, refused the job in a letter on September 4.

Besides, the petition, filed through advocate Haris Beeran on Saturday, argued that the Kerala government had already filed an affidavit on October 6 submitting that a thorough investigation conducted by the State police had found no need for an NIA probe. The NIA has already filed a status report in three sealed envelopes.

Mr. Jahan himself had filed a petition to recall the August 16 order, following which the Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra had modified its order on October 30 and directed Ms. Hadiya to be produced in person before it on November 27 at 3 p.m.

“By continuing to investigate in the present matter, without any guidance of a retired Judge of this court, the NIA has acted in a grossly contemptuous and mala fide manner against the directions of this court in the orders dated 16.8.2017 and 30.10.2017,” the petition alleged.

The petition further said the public comments made on November 7 by National Commission for Women (NCW) chairperson Rekha Sharma after meeting Ms. Hadiya in Kerala were “uncalled for”, especially when the matter had been pending before the Supreme Court. The Kerala Women’s Commission had not been allowed permission to meet the girl.

“Ms. Rekha Sharma proceeded to provide a comment on the matter by saying that in Kerala forced religious conversions take place, not love jihad,” the petition said.

Her visit and the comments were made with a “vested interest and mala fide intent to prejudice the present proceeding” in the Supreme Court, it said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.